Identifying the Critical Communicational Factors Relations in

EPC Projects: A DEMATEL Framework

Sara Sajedi

Amirkabir University of Technology

Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Department

Hafez Avenue

Tehran

Iran

Email: sarasajedi@aut.ac.ir

Naser Shams Gharneh

Amirkabir University of Technology

Industrial Engineering and Management Systems Department

Hafez Avenue

Tehran

Iran

Tel: +982164545363

Email: nshams@aut.ac.ir

Abstract Considering that contractors are one of the main pillars of construction projects and also an important factor in

converting resources into the final product, it is important to evaluate and select contractors and suppliers. The

selection of a contractor for construction projects is primarily based on the lowest price, but many other

factors, quantitatively or qualitatively, have great importance in choosing a contractor or supplier. In this

paper, taking into account the construction companies of EPC, factors affecting to the selection of contractors

and suppliers and their impact on each other are considered. This review is based on the DEMATEL method

and by applying this approach, affected or effected factors are used to evaluate and rank the indicators in the

selection of suppliers or subcontractors. Therefore, using this method, the main contractors in construction

projects do not select suppliers or subcontractors in an intellectual way, and this choice will be based

on indicators.

Keywords Supply Chain Management, Supplier Performance Evaluation, EPC Projects

2053

Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM)

Paris, France, July 26-27, 2018

1. INTRODUCTION

The construction industry is one of the largest industries and has the highest GDP in each country[1]. Despite the

size and impact of the construction industry in the economy, its acceptance rate for the supply chain is slowing down

[2, 3]. The overall goal of supply chain management, the integrity of organizational units and the coordination of

flow of materials, information and money are to improve the competitiveness of the chain [4-6]. In fact, supply

chain management is a network management of tasks that are interconnected and geared towards meeting the needs

of customers [7], But supply chain management in construction projects1 is defined as: The strategic management of

the flow of information, activities, tasks, and processes involve a variety of networks of independent organizations

and communication paths (upward and downward) that cause the value from the completed project to its owner [8].

In the supply chain of construction projects, upstream activities are from the perspective of the main contractor, the

project owner/owners and the design or engineering group that is preparing the construction process. Downstream

activities also include suppliers and subcontractors that interact with the main contractor for construction work in the

project, which requires a lot of coordination between the two sides of the project. In order to succeed in construction

projects, among other competitors, the communication between the best supplier and subcontractor is necessary, but

it should be said that usually, construction companies do not have an expert in identifying the supplier and the

contractor and do not have a scientific method for selection, so do this only on the basis of the perception, but it is

necessary to select the main contractors based on the predetermined indicators of their suppliers and evaluate them

on the basis of scientific methods. As companies leave the market for various reasons, the main contractors must

have alternatives to it, and, finally, the contractor must share information with the strategic suppliers [8]. Based on

the extensive review of published works and interviews, the quality of the relationship between project owners,

contractors and building construction consultants was defined and then presented seven strategies that included trust,

commitment, cooperation, and communication as a feature Critical Issues for Quality Relations [9]. When trust,

communication, commitment, mutual goals and continuous improvement were found among the key factors for

establishing a successful relationship between project owners and major contractors in the project, According to the

results obtained from the strategies used in construction projects, trust, communication, commitment, mutual goals,

and continuous improvement of critical factors are for a successful job relationship between project owners and

major contractors in construction [10-13],other important factors, such as teamwork, risk assignment and problem

solving, play an important role in communications between main contractors and suppliers and / or subcontractors

[14-16]. These findings indicate that in the construction sector, the critical factors that the interface between the

main contractors and suppliers or subcontractors may differ from the main customers and contractors. Deciding to

evaluate and select suppliers and subcontractors is a multi-criteria decision problem that is not usually complicated

and structured, and can be solved by employing management tools, including Multi-Criteria Decision Making2 and

System Dynamics approach [17-20]. The main focus of this paper is on EPC3 projects, in which all the activities

necessary to run a project from the design and engineering stage to the procurement of goods and final construction

will be borne by the contractor. In EPC projects, the main contractors should be included innovative design and

procurement options to find the right balance between profit margins and inherent risks, and also they should

overcome the massive problems in purchasing, transportation and equipment cost [21, 22]. In recent literature, the

main relationship is often between project owners and contractors in construction projects [17],[23, 24]. These

findings are likely to be different from the relationship between the customer and the main contractor as critical

structural factors affecting the construction sector among main contractors and suppliers and/or subcontractor [25].

According to studies, today the type of application of EPC projects in construction is much more practical than

traditional construction projects, and in many projects, construction projects have become internationally 4

significant and have grown dramatically have also been involved in recent years. Therefore, supply chain

implementation in EPC projects is needed in order to be more profitable. Therefore, reviewing the literature will

examine the impact indicators in managing the relationship between the main contractors and suppliers and/or

subcontractors that affect the EPC projects. So, at first, the importance of these indicators in EPC projects is

evaluated and then its impact on EPC projects will be reviewed.

1 Construction Supply Chain Management ( CSCM) 2 Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) 3 Engineering Procurement and Construction 4 International engineering, procurement, and construction (IEPC)

2054

This study, using the DEMATEL5 method, for considering the influences of the effective factors to each other than

from the review of the literature and, accordingly, make the effective factors more effectively.

In the second part, the relevant literature is analyzed in relation to the effective indicators for the success of EPC

projects, and then, the methods performed are examined. The next part examines the research method used in this

study, and finally, the results of this study will be examined.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Few studies have been conducted in traditional construction but interesting studies have been done on how different

factors of supply chain relationships affect the relationship between project owners and main contractors, or between

main contractors and/or subcontractors [26, 27]. Here are the factors that have the influence on the success of EPC

projects.

2-1. Cooperation relationship Fulford and Standing [28], Kanda and Deshmukh [29] and Thompson and Sanders [30] have shown that

collaborative relationships often can be lead to Interaction, quick resolution of outstanding issues and overall project

success[31-34].

2-2. Connect and share information Both the quality and the quantity of shared information are important for the success of communication [9], [12],

[35-39]. Effective joint communication, in particular bilateral communication [21], [28], [32]. Enabling partners to

better understand each other's expectations, enabling buyers to better understand the supplier's capabilities and

increasing the trust and relationships, and also solves the problems "as quickly and as low as possible without needs

mediation and improves legal processes "[14] also promotes innovation[11]. So It is not surprising, therefore, that

lack of communication among project partners often leads to distrust, weak relationships and low performance of the

project [12].

2.3. Continuous improvement Continuous improvement refers to efforts to improve the production process, services and processes associated with

a long-term focus in an organization [40]. Continuous improvement to promote joint learning within and between

organizations, among suppliers and their customers, has been used to extend positive outcomes to future projects

and to avoid repetition of past mistakes [41-43].

2.4. Common goal Most contractors and suppliers and/or subcontractors have conflicting objectives [30]. Due to the insistence of the

main contractor to reduce prices, subcontractors and/or suppliers tend to suspect even the appropriate improvement

plans proposed by the main contractors [44, 45]. Due to the ambiguity in the poor cooperation agreement, victory of

one of the parties can lead to the loss of the other party [46], it can also lead to inconsistency, disagreement, and

ultimately poor performance of the project [47]. On the other hand, when the main contractors and suppliers and/or

subcontractors mutually share their goals with the potential outcomes, they increase the level of collaboration and

improve the overall performance of the project [30], [33].

2.5. Solve the problem effectively Effective problem solving involves creating a primarily warning system for identifying potential issues and using

formal/informal feedback to identify opportunities for improving project performance, such a mechanism may be

short-term for a single project or for a long-term for multiple project programs [21],[31]. A number of studies

support joint problem solving and collective decision-making because problem-solving techniques are more useful

in this case [33], [37], [48-50]. Therefore, it is logical that this factor also is taken into account in this study.

2.6. Fair risk allocation Typically, a long and multi-level supply chain for EPC projects, which main contractors rely on suppliers and/or

subcontractors to complete a successful project, poses further challenges in risk management [33], [51, 52] . A

significant portion of the total budget is used to provide goods [17]. However, suppliers and/or subcontractors not

only have the same ability but are not at the same uncertainty [53]. A number of studies have identified the

5 DEMATEL ( Decision Making Trial And Evaluation)

2055

important role of fair risk allocation in the construction sector[9],[36], [54]. Therefore, the effect of this factor on

managing relationships in EPC projects is reviewed.

2.7. Selection criteria for supplier and subcontractor The recent supply chain literature and the Project Management Office indicate the importance of selecting a supplier

and/or subcontractor [47], [55-57]. Deliverables and services are assigned as "customer-centric criteria" [48], and

these criteria are widely used to select and evaluate suppliers and subcontractors [47], [58]. Hence, this study

focuses on these two features, which will probably have a significant impact on the project results.

2.7.1. Reliability in delivery In the field of procurement and construction projects, the ability of deliver primarily to the reliability of suppliers

and /or subcontractors in order to provide products, materials, equipment, installation, repair and maintenance,

technical knowledge and other services at the right time, It's in the right place and in the right amount [58-62].

Therefore, considering the important role that plays this index, it is necessary to be seen in EPC projects.

2.7.2. Services provided by suppliers and/or subcontractors

Services have been widely considered among the criteria used to select and evaluate supplier and/or subcontractor

[55], [58], [63, 64]. It is recommended that the buyer's organization select a limited number of suppliers and/or

subcontractors in accordance with the requirements and service capabilities of the supply chain in order to minimize

processing costs, the time between ordering and receiving the customer, Risk and overall performance improvement

[14], [32], [38], [65]. Therefore, due to the role and importance of services in EPC projects, this factor is also felt.

2.8. Trust Conscience is widely used as an important indicator of communication in the supply chain [9] [13] [31] [36] [42].

However, due to mistrust in the construction sector, most contractors are often pushing for optimal quotes, and

suppliers and/or subcontractors try to keep cost information to themselves, fearing that contractors may end the

margin of profit in their favor in the future [16] [38] [60]. But if the relationship of trust between partners is created,

it can lead to closer cooperation, lower transaction costs, and the risk of the supply chain and improve project

performance [13] [28] [46]. So with regard to the literature review, mutual trust can be significant and important in

construction.

2.9. Measure project results The three basic principles of cost, time, and quality are mainly used by most stakeholders to evaluate the results of

construction projects [66, 67]. In general, time measurement is presented with aspects of project duration, for

example, filling time, construction time, construction speed, time variation, and so on. Measuring the cost with total

cost of ownership, which is not limited to the total amount of the bid, includes the costs of changes, amendments, or

legal claims, and with the estimation of unit costs, the percentage of net changes, total final cost, etc., the total cost

can be measured by the size Made. Typically, the quality of construction in the industry is more measured by the

success of the project because it attracts attention [59]. Cost, time and quality are also generally used effectively in

communication research in the supply chain of construction [15] [68, 69].

3. METHOD

In this research, a DEMATEL technique is used to examine the effect of factors on each other on EPC projects.

DEMATEL technique uses one of a variety of decision-making methods based on paired comparisons using expert

judgments in extracting the factors of a system and systematically structuring them by applying the principles of

graph theory, using a hierarchical structure of factors in the system with affected or effected interactions. In such a

way as to express the effect of these relations as numerical scores. The DEMATEL methodology is used to identify

and investigate the relationship between criteria and inter-network relationships. Because the directional graphs can

better illustrate the relationships between the elements of a system, this technique is based on graphs that can divide

the factors involved into two causative and causal groups, and their relationship as a structural model

understandable. DEMATEL technique was generally developed to study the very complex global issues.

DEMATEL is also used to construct a sequence of supposed information. As the severity of the communication is

evaluated as a reward, it traces back their important feedback and accepts non-transferable relationships.

Considering interconnections; the advantage of this approach to network analysis technique is its clarity and

2056

transparency in reflecting interactions between a wide ranges of components. So that professionals can more fluent

in expressing their opinions about the effects (direction and severity of effects) between criteria. It should be noted

that the matrix derived from the DEMATEL technique (internal communication matrix) actually forms part of the

super matrices. In other words, DEMATEL technique does not work independently, but as a subsystem of a larger

system such as ANP. The structuring of complex factors in the form of cause and effect groups is another subject

discussed in this technique. This is one of the most important functions and one of the most important reasons for its

extensive use in problem-solving processes. By deconstructing a wide range of complex factors in the form of

impaired cause groups, the decision maker in a more appropriate context will understand the relationship. This

makes it more aware of the place of the factors and the role played by mutual interaction.

The DEMATEL technique includes the following steps:

Formation of a Direct Contact Matrix (M): When using multi-viewpoint, we use the simple average of the

comments and form M.

Normalize the direct relation matrix: N = K*M

Which in this formula k is calculated as follows; first, the sum of all rows and columns is calculated. The

reciprocal of the largest number of rows and columns is k.

Calculate the complete communication matrix

Create causal chart:

The sum of the elements of row (D) for each factor indicates the extent of its effect on other system factors.

(Effect of Variables)

The sum of column elements (R) for each factor indicates the extent of its impact on other system factors.

(Variable Effectiveness)

Therefore, horizontal vector (D + R) is the amount of impact and effect of the agent in the system. In the

other word, the greater the amount (D + R) of a particular factor, the more interacting with other system

factors. Vertical Vector (D-R) shows the power of each agent's influence. In general, if (D-R) is positive,

the variable is a causal variable and, if negative, is considered an effect.

Finally, a Cartesian coordinate system is mapped. In this machine, the axis is longitudinal (D + R) and the

transverse axis is based on (D-R). The position of each agent is determined by the point to the coordinates

((D + R), (D-R)). In this way, a graphic diagram will also be obtained.

Proposed Analytical Steps

The analytical process seen in this article is in the following steps: Each step is the basis of the next step.

The first step is to examine and identify the effective factors in EPC projects. These indicators are based on

extensive literature reviews.

Step Two: At this stage, direct matrices (Matrices of Paired Comparisons between Criteria) are collected, then the

interrelationships of the criteria are evaluated by expert opinions. Each matrix expert has a direct relationship and

interaction between experts is inevitable.

Step 3: When the matrix collection process is complete, we normalize the matrix. At this stage, the numbers in this

matrix are between zero and one, but it should be noted that its sum is not necessarily equal to one.

Step Four: Now we make the matrix (I-N), in which "I" is equal to the unit vector, and "N" is the matrix that is made

in the previous step.

Step Five: Here we reverse the resulting matrix and then multiply the matrix N in the matrix, it should be noted that

this is a multiplication of matrices.

Step 6: At this point, we write the sum of each row and each column, sum the row is D, and sum the column is R,

then calculate (D-R) and (D + R). In (D + R), the largest factor (the largest number) is the factor that has the most

interaction with the rest of the factors, and the lowest number will have the least interaction with the rest. But in the

(D-R), the largest factor is known as the most effective factor and the smallest factor as the most effective factor. Of

course, no calculations should be done manually and will be performed with Excel software due to the size of the

calculation. It should also be taken into account that DEMATEL is a multi-criteria decision that identifies the

relationship between criteria and sub-criteria and the importance of them, but does not provide a ranking between

criteria and only gives us the relationship between criteria.

2057

4. RESULTS

This section discusses the approach used in the DEMATEL analysis in this study.

I. The first step is to list the factors:

DEMATEL methodology collects views and contributions from project owners /contractors through the mental

storm and group methodology in relation to the impact of factors extracted from the literature review. To keep

confidentiality, the names of specialists will not be published in this article.

Table 1 - Proposed measurement criteria

Factors Symbol

The relationship of collaboration A

Communication and information sharing B

Continuous improvement C

Common goal D

Effective problem solving E

Fair risk allocation F

Supplier selection criteria And Subcontractor G

Reliability in delivery G

Services provided by suppliers and /or subcontractors G

Trust H

Measurement of Project Results I

II. Step Two: Create a Direct Relationship Matrix

This stage of DEMATEL analysis is to analyze the relationship between the invoices. According to the agreement of

the main contractors, relations in the direct relationship matrix are identified in Table 2. In this table, attention is

paid to knowing how to encourage a particular benchmark for others. Here are the average opinions of the experts

(project managers) from the three sustainable construction companies of the Sazeh Paydar (consisting of 4 main

contractors and 11 subcontractors),Sabz Andishan (consisting of 3 main contractors and 7 subcontractors) and Royal

Sazeh Structures (including 5 main contractors and 9 contractors) which, an EPC project organizer, who has

sufficient experience in evaluating suppliers and subcontractors in various projects.

Table 2 - Creating a Direct Relationship Matrix

A B C D E F G H I

A 0.00 1.33 4.00 2.67 2.33 1.67 4.00 4.00 3.00

B 3.67 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.67 3.00 1.33 0.33

C 3.33 4.00 0.00 4.00 4.00 3.33 4.00 3.00 1.33

D 4.00 3.33 1.00 0.00 0.67 3.00 2.67 1.33 2.33

E 3.67 4.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 2.67 4.00 2.33 0.00

F 2.33 3.67 3.33 3.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 3.33 0.00

G 4.00 2.33 3.33 3.67 1.33 3.33 0.00 4.00 2.33

H 3.00 3.00 2.67 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 0.00 2.67

I 2.33 3.33 3.67 3.33 2.67 4.00 4.00 3.67 0.00

2058

III. Step Three: Obtain an Internal Affiliation Matrix

At this point, the extracted results from Excel software are presented with consideration of the inputs previously

examined. This step is achieved after normalization. The criteria are, respectively the relationship of collaboration

(A), communication and information sharing (B), continuous improvement (C), common goal (D), effective problem

solving (E), fair risk allocation (F), supplier selection criteria And Subcontractor: Reliability in Transformation,

Services Provided by Suppliers and / or Subcontractors (G), Trust (H), Measurement of Project Results (I).

Table 3 - Relationship vector and relative (relative importance) for cause and effect group for suppliers

R D R+D R-D

A 0.16644132 0.227149811 0.39359113 -0.06070849

B 0.082477015 0.251892915 0.33436993 -0.1694159

C 0.271498107 0.189291509 0.460789616 0.082206598

D 0.166035695 0.206192537 0.372228231 -0.04015684

E 0.222958356 0.123985938 0.346944294 0.098972418

F 0.19753921 0.214575446 0.412114657 -0.01703624

G 0.213223364 0.283937263 0.497160627 -0.0707139

H 0.180773391 0.195375879 0.37614927 -0.01460249

I 0.249323959 0.057869118 0.307193077 0.19145484

Table 4 - Complete matrix

A B C D E F G H I

A -0.0928 -0.0407 0.0784 0.0175 0.0317 -0.0235 0.0578 0.0722 0.0657

B 0.0978 -0.0321 -0.0438 -0.0010 -0.0224 0.0283 0.0689 0.0041 -0.0174

C 0.0174 0.0558 -0.0811 0.0665 0.1046 0.0401 0.0425 0.0251 0.0002

D 0.0846 0.0663 -0.0247 -0.0599 -0.0117 0.0565 0.0224 -0.0194 0.0519

E 0.0477 0.0750 0.0485 0.0400 -0.0428 0.0296 0.0612 0.0109 -0.0473

F 0.0008 0.0673 0.0705 0.0467 -0.0050 -0.0682 0.0718 0.0596 -0.0461

G 0.0611 -0.0016 0.0505 0.0596 -0.0054 0.0462 -0.1047 0.0704 0.0370

H 0.0311 0.0362 0.0324 0.0009 0.0294 0.0427 0.0223 -0.0768 0.0623

I -0.0206 0.0255 0.0584 0.0356 0.0455 0.0627 0.0415 0.0490 -0.0485

Table 5 - Binary matrix

A B C D E F G H I

A 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1

B 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0

C 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0

D 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1

E 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0

F 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0

G 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1

H 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

I 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0

In the table below, which is the final table, effects are examined. If each of the calculations in Table 4 is greater than

the mean, 1, otherwise it becomes zero and indicates that it has no effect. For example, the cooperative relationship

(A) is effective on continuous improvement (C), but it does not affect the allocation of fair risk, or trust (H) affects

2059

all factors and only affects the common purpose (D). The effectiveness of each of the factors expressed as zero and

one is shown in the graph below.

Figure 1-Cause Diagram

5. CONCLUSION Considering that EPC construction companies do not have specific criteria for choosing a supplier or subcontractor,

in this research, using the DEMATEL method, effective and affective factors for evaluating and ranking factors in

choosing suppliers or subcontractors are identified. Therefore, using this method, the main contractors do not choose

suppliers or subcontractors, and this choice will be based on indicators. The research was carried out in three major

construction companies and it was observed that the choice of the supplier or subcontractor was carried out safely,

which also resolved many of the problems of selecting suppliers or subcontractors. It is suggested that future

selection of models for selection of selected projects be presented.

2060

References

1. Cheng, J.C., et al., A service oriented framework for construction supply chain integration.

Automation in construction, 2010. 19(2): p. 245-260.

2. Akintoye, A., G. McIntosh, and E. Fitzgerald, A survey of supply chain collaboration and

management in the UK construction industry. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply

Management, 2000. 6(3-4): p. 159-168.

3. Gadde, L.-E. and A. Dubois, Partnering in the construction industry—Problems and

opportunities. Journal of purchasing and supply management, 2010. 16(4): p. 254-263.

4. Stadtler, H., Supply chain management and advanced planning––basics, overview and

challenges. European journal of operational research, 2005. 163(3): p. 575-588.

5. Tabrizi, B. and J. Razmi. A stochastic programming based approach for supply chain network

design under uncertain processing costs. in The 11th Asia Pacific Industrial Engineering and

Management Systems Conference. 2010.

6. Chopra, S. and P. Meindl, Supply chain management. Strategy, planning & operation, in Das

summa summarum des management. 2007, Springer. p. 265-275.

7. Thomas, D.J. and P.M. Griffin, Coordinated supply chain management. European journal of

operational research, 1996. 94(1): p. 1-15.

8. Benton, W. and L.F. McHenry, Construction purchasing & supply chain management. 2010:

McGraw-Hill New York.

9. Jelodar, M.B., T.W. Yiu, and S. Wilkinson, A conceptualisation of relationship quality in

construction procurement. International Journal of Project Management, 2016. 34(6): p. 997-

1011.

10. Black, C., A. Akintoye, and E. Fitzgerald, An analysis of success factors and benefits of

partnering in construction. International journal of project management, 2000. 18(6): p. 423-434.

11. Cheng, E.W. and H. Li, Construction partnering process and associated critical success factors:

quantitative investigation. Journal of management in engineering, 2002. 18(4): p. 194-202.

12. Ng, S.T., et al., Problematic issues associated with project partnering—the contractor

perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 2002. 20(6): p. 437-449.

13. Bastan, M., et al., Sustainable development of agriculture: a system dynamics model. Kybernetes,

2017.

14. Beach, R., M. Webster, and K.M. Campbell, An evaluation of partnership development in the

construction industry. International Journal of Project Management, 2005. 23(8): p. 611-621.

15. Humphreys, P., J. Matthews, and M. Kumaraswamy, Pre-construction project partnering: from

adversarial to collaborative relationships. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal,

2003. 8(2): p. 166-178.

16. Meng, X., The effect of relationship management on project performance in construction.

International journal of project management, 2012. 30(2): p. 188-198.

17. Ahmadvand, A.M., et al., Analysis of Tehran construction and demolition waste management

with System Dynamics Approach. Asian Journal of Research in Business Economics and

Management, 2014. 4(8): p. 234-242.

18. Bastan, M. and L. Azizi Baraftabi. The effect of HSE programs on time and cost of construction

projects: An analysis based on System Dynamics methodology. in The 1st International

Conference on Industrial Engineering, Management and Accounting, Tehran, Iran. 2016.

University of Applied Science and Technology.

19. Bastan, M., M. Mosaed, and F. Kashef. Dynamic Analysis of Housing Cost Changes in Tehran. in

The 9th International Conference on Industrial Engineering (IIEC2013), Tehran, Iran. 2013.

K.N. Toosi University of Technology.

2061

20. Khoshneshin, F. and M. Bastan. Analysis of dynamics of crisis management in the earthquake

and performance Improvement using system dynamics methodology. in The 10th International

Conference on Industrial Engineering (IIEC2014), Tehran, Iran. 2013. Tehran University.

21. Dainty, A.R., S.J. Millett, and G.H. Briscoe, New perspectives on construction supply chain

integration. Supply chain management: An international journal, 2001. 6(4): p. 163-173.

22. Vrijhoef, R. and L. Koskela, The four roles of supply chain management in construction.

European journal of purchasing & supply management, 2000. 6(3-4): p. 169-178.

23. Briscoe, G. and A. Dainty, Construction supply chain integration: an elusive goal? Supply chain

management: an international journal, 2005. 10(4): p. 319-326.

24. Kadefors, A., E. Björlingson, and A. Karlsson, Procuring service innovations: Contractor

selection for partnering projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2007. 25(4): p.

375-385.

25. Pal, R., P. Wang, and X. Liang, The critical factors in managing relationships in international

engineering, procurement, and construction (IEPC) projects of Chinese organizations.

International Journal of Project Management, 2017. 35(7): p. 1225-1237.

26. Chen, W.T. and T.-T. Chen, Critical success factors for construction partnering in Taiwan.

International Journal of Project Management, 2007. 25(5): p. 475-484.

27. Deutsch, M., Constructive conflict resolution: Principles, training, and research. Journal of

social issues, 1994. 50(1): p. 13-32.

28. Fulford, R. and C. Standing, Construction industry productivity and the potential for

collaborative practice. International Journal of Project Management, 2014. 32(2): p. 315-326.

29. Kanda, A. and S. Deshmukh, Supply chain coordination: perspectives, empirical studies and

research directions. International journal of production Economics, 2008. 115(2): p. 316-335.

30. Thompson, P.J. and S.R. Sanders, Peer-reviewed paper: partnering continuum. Journal of

Management in Engineering, 1998. 14(5): p. 73-78.

31. Brahm, F. and J. Tarzijan, Relational Contracts and Collaboration in the Supply Chain: Impact

of Expected Future Business Volume on the Make‐or‐Buy Decision. Journal of Supply Chain

Management, 2016. 52(3): p. 48-67.

32. Broft, R., S.M. Badi, and S. Pryke, Towards supply chain maturity in construction. Built

Environment Project and Asset Management, 2016. 6(2): p. 187-204.

33. Du, L., et al., Enhancing engineer–procure–construct project performance by partnering in

international markets: Perspective from Chinese construction companies. International Journal of

Project Management, 2016. 34(1): p. 30-43.

34. Meng, X., Assessment framework for construction supply chain relationships: Development and

evaluation. International Journal of Project Management, 2010. 28(7): p. 695-707.

35. Ab Talib, M.S. and A.B. Abdul Hamid, Application of critical success factors in supply chain

management. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 2014. 3(1).

36. Doloi, H., Key Factors of Relational Partnerships in Project Management, in Handbook on

Project Management and Scheduling Vol. 2. 2015, Springer. p. 1047-1061.

37. Monczka, R.M., et al., Success factors in strategic supplier alliances: the buying company

perspective. Decision sciences, 1998. 29(3): p. 553-577.

38. Zhao, Z.-Y., et al., Corporate social responsibility for construction contractors: a China study.

Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 2016. 14(3): p. 614-640.

39. Dainty, A.R., G.H. Briscoe, and S.J. Millett, Subcontractor perspectives on supply chain

alliances. Construction Management & Economics, 2001. 19(8): p. 841-848.

40. Bhuiyan, N. and A. Baghel, An overview of continuous improvement: from the past to the present.

Management decision, 2005. 43(5): p. 761-771.

41. Babaeian Jelodar, M., T.W. Yiu, and S. Wilkinson, Assessing contractual relationship quality:

Study of judgment trends among construction industry participants. Journal of Management in

Engineering, 2016. 33(1): p. 04016028.

2062

42. Carrillo, P., Lessons learned practices in the engineering, procurement and construction sector.

Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 2005. 12(3): p. 236-250.

43. Salmasnia, A., M. Bastan, and A. Moeini, A robust intelligent framework for multiple response

statistical optimization problems based on artificial neural network and Taguchi method.

International Journal of Quality, Statistics, and Reliability, 2012. 2012.

44. Hartmann, A. and J. Caerteling, Subcontractor procurement in construction: the interplay of

price and trust. Supply chain management: an international journal, 2010. 15(5): p. 354-362.

45. Tavakoli, H. and M. Bastan. A Holistic View to Performance Measurement: An Integrated

Approch of Balanced Scorecard And Analytic Hierarchy Process. in The 1st International

Conference on Industrial Engineering, Management and Accounting, Tehran, Iran. 2016.

University of Applied Science and Technology.

46. Larson, E., Project partnering: results of study of 280 construction projects. Journal of

management in engineering, 1995. 11(2): p. 30-35.

47. Tang, W., C.F. Duffield, and D.M. Young, Partnering mechanism in construction: An empirical

study on the Chinese construction industry. Journal of Construction Engineering and

Management, 2006. 132(3): p. 217-229.

48. Cheng, E.W., H. Li, and P. Love, Establishment of critical success factors for construction

partnering. Journal of management in engineering, 2000. 16(2): p. 84-92.

49. Meng, X., The role of trust in relationship development and performance improvement. Journal

of Civil Engineering and Management, 2015. 21(7): p. 845-853.

50. Ho, W., et al., Supply chain risk management: a literature review. International Journal of

Production Research, 2015. 53(16): p. 5031-5069.

51. Liu, J., X. Zhao, and P. Yan, Risk paths in international construction projects: Case study from

Chinese contractors. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 2016. 142(6): p.

05016002.

52. Zsidisin, G.A., A. Panelli, and R. Upton, Purchasing organization involvement in risk

assessments, contingency plans, and risk management: an exploratory study. Supply Chain

Management: An International Journal, 2000. 5(4): p. 187-198.

53. Manu, E., et al., Trust influencing factors in main contractor and subcontractor relationships

during projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2015. 33(7): p. 1495-1508.

54. El-Sayegh, S.M., Risk assessment and allocation in the UAE construction industry. International

journal of project management, 2008. 26(4): p. 431-438.

55. Ho, W., X. Xu, and P.K. Dey, Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation

and selection: A literature review. European Journal of operational research, 2010. 202(1): p. 16-

24.

56. Nair, A., J. Jayaram, and A. Das, Strategic purchasing participation, supplier selection, supplier

evaluation and purchasing performance. International Journal of Production Research, 2015.

53(20): p. 6263-6278.

57. Yeo, K. and J. Ning, Integrating supply chain and critical chain concepts in engineer-procure-

construct (EPC) projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2002. 20(4): p. 253-262.

58. Luzon, B. and S.M. El-Sayegh, Evaluating supplier selection criteria for oil and gas projects in

the UAE using AHP and Delphi. International Journal of Construction Management, 2016. 16(2):

p. 175-183.

59. Eshtehardian, E., P. Ghodousi, and A. Bejanpour, Using ANP and AHP for the supplier selection

in the construction and civil engineering companies; case study of Iranian company. KSCE

Journal of Civil Engineering, 2013. 17(2): p. 262-270.

60. Kotula, M., et al., Strategic sourcing supplier selection misalignment with critical success

factors: Findings from multiple case studies in Germany and the United Kingdom. International

Journal of Production Economics, 2015. 166: p. 238-247.

61. Ulubeyli, S., E. Manisali, and A. Kazaz, Subcontractor selection practices in international

construction projects. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2010. 16(1): p. 47-56.

2063

62. Weber, C.A. and L.M. Ellram, Supplier selection using multi-objective programming: a decision

support system approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics

Management, 1993. 23(2): p. 3-14.

63. Amid, A., S. Ghodsypour, and C. O’Brien, A weighted max–min model for fuzzy multi-objective

supplier selection in a supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 2011.

131(1): p. 139-145.

64. De Boer, L., E. Labro, and P. Morlacchi, A review of methods supporting supplier selection.

European journal of purchasing & supply management, 2001. 7(2): p. 75-89.

65. Forsythe, P., Monitoring customer perceived service quality and satisfaction during the

construction process. Construction Economics and Building, 2015. 15(1): p. 19-42.

66. Chan, A.P. and A.P. Chan, Key performance indicators for measuring construction success.

Benchmarking: an international journal, 2004. 11(2): p. 203-221.

67. Ling, F.Y.Y., et al., Drivers and barriers to adopting relational contracting practices in public

projects: Comparative study of Beijing and Sydney. International Journal of Project Management,

2014. 32(2): p. 275-285.

68. Wang, X. and J. Huang, The relationships between key stakeholders’ project performance and

project success: Perceptions of Chinese construction supervising engineers. International Journal

of Project Management, 2006. 24(3): p. 253-260.

69. Mokhtari, H., A. Salmasnia, and M. Bastan. Three Dimensional Time, Cost and Quality Tradeoff

Optimization in Project Decision Making. in Advanced Materials Research. 2012. Trans Tech

Publications.

Biographies Naser S. Gharneh is an Associate Professor in the Industrial Engineering and Management Systems

Department at Amirkabir University of Technology (AUT) where he has been a faculty member since

1993. Naser has been a member of the research faculty since 2000. He is the Industrial Engineering and

Productivity Research Centre Director at AUT. Naser completed his Ph.D. at UMIST in the UK and his

master and undergraduate studies at AUT. His research interests lie in the areas of Industrial Engineering

and Financial Management. He has collaborated actively with other research centres in several other

disciplines of Education Management and Productivity. Naser has been the Director of Iranian Students

in the UK and Ireland from 2002 to 2007. He has stablished many academic links between Iranian and

UK Universities. Naser has served on more than thirty conference and workshop program committees

since 1990. For additional information see: http://www.aut.ac.ir/official/main.asp?uid=nshams

Sara Sajedi is currently Master of Science Student in Industrial Engineering at Amirkabir University of Technology

(AUT).

2064